The Cost of Free Wi-Fi Could Be Private Company Data
Lawyers seeking internet outside of company walls should steer clear of public Wi-Fi, highlighted by the Department of Justice's indictment of Russian hackers last week.
October 09, 2018 at 01:00 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Corporate Counsel
In-house lawyers are always on the go, a mobility that sometimes means leaving the safety and security of company Wi-Fi.
But lawyers seeking internet outside of company walls should steer clear of public Wi-Fi, highlighted by the Department of Justice's indictment of Russian hackers last week. The hackers used hotel Wi-Fi networks to compromise laptops and steal passwords and other private data belonging to Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) and World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) officials.
Cybersecurity experts say there are a number of ways in-house counsel can prevent similar hacks from impacting their company. Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr partner Sandy Bilus, who focuses on cybersecurity and privacy, offers an easy first step.
“Stay off public Wi-Fi networks,” Bilus said. “That would include hotel Wi-Fi, airport Wi-Fi, those hotspots that are out and about that you can sometimes find out in the world. If you can avoid it, do.”
That can be difficult for lawyers working on the go or out of office. While the hotel or coffee shop Wi-Fi might be the easiest internet source available, sensitive company information is at risk.
Adam Levin, the chairman and founder of identity and data protection company CyberScout, said there are steps corporate counsel can take to be safer when working in public.
“There are ways you can help prevent things like that. First: long and strong passwords,” Levin said. He suggested using a password master system and two-factor authentication, avoiding clicking on any links and using company virtual private networks.
“Have a personal hotspot, so you're not relying on the Wi-Fi system of that conference center or that hotel to have access to the internet,” he added.
But it's not just about ensuring in-house lawyers keep private data secure.
“One of the roles of in-house counsel is to reduce the risk faced by the company, and an important way to do that is to reduce your cybersecurity risk,” Bilus said. “So in-house counsel should be working hand and hand with an information security team or IT team to tell its employees about the dangers of using public Wi-Fi networks. That can be done through regular trainings, seminars and email reminders.”
Doug DePeppe, founder of eosedge Legal, said companies should provide traveling employees with mobile hotspots so they're not forced to rely on public or semi-public Wi-Fi. He also noted the importance of a company cybersecurity plan, which in-house lawyers can help create, and internal policies around employee use of public Wi-Fi.
Levin noted the importance of ensuring vendors have privacy policies and strong cybersecurity measures in place as well.
If companies don't take reasonable cybersecurity steps and wind up hacked, it's possible they could be held liable by the Federal Trade Commission, Bilus said.
“Because it is fairly well known, the dangers of using public Wi-Fi, I think that if in-house counsel are not helping to guard against those risks, then it makes it more likely the company will be exposed to liability if there is a breach because of somebody's use of public Wi-Fi,” he said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllA Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
4 minute read'Appropriate Relief'?: Google Offers Remedy Concessions in DOJ Antitrust Fight
4 minute readLife, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Customers: Developments on ‘Conquesting’ from the Ninth Circuit
8 minute readLegal Departments Gripe About Outside Counsel but Rarely Talk to Them
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The end of the 'Rust' criminal case against Alec Baldwin may unlock a civil lawsuit
- 2Solana Labs Co-Founder Allegedly Pocketed Ex-Wife’s ‘Millions of Dollars’ of Crypto Gains
- 3What We Heard From Litigation Leaders This Year
- 4What's Next For Johnson & Johnson's Talcum Powder Litigation?
- 5The Legal's Top 5 Pennsylvania Verdicts of 2024
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250